Wot I Heard: Elite: Dangerous

So for today’s Supporter post I decided to try something a little different. It’s not a podcast but it’s an audio episode of sorts – a Wot I Heard which zeroes in on Frontier’s space sim Elite: Dangerous. We’ve spoken to Frontier CEO David Braben about the refund situation, we’ve interrupted Brendy’s afternoon of space adventures to talk about what he loves and hates about said space adventures and we’ve collected a handful of stories from the people who play the game.

Given it’s something a bit new (and I have never touched audio editing before in my life) it would be great to know whether you enjoy it and – if you do – which other games you’d be interested in us giving the Wot I Heard treatment. Who knows – next time I might have mastered theme tunes or even sound effects!

(Also yes, the Skype call sounds weirdly flat – I’ll be trying to fix that somehow!)

137 Comments

  1. Cinek says:

    Jeez, Braben is really frustrating.

    He’s still stuck with these BS statements of “there’s very few people asking for refunds” – which always makes me laugh through tears. Why the f*** do we have whole this circus if it’s “not a huge number”?! If it’s just very few people then give refunds unconditionally!
    It’s amusing how he is saying that they talked with everyone affected individually… right…. BS.
    In general this whole case-by-case refunds scam scheme sounds like “it’s a shame that we didn’t go for case-by-case refunds since a very beginning – then we’d avoid this whole mess WHILE STILL DOING EXACTLY THE SAME THING – granting refunds only for people who didn’t play the game”… they still don’t see anything wrong with blocking the refunds to the people who basically did work for them for free – testing the game.

    And finally – it’s sad that none of the uncomfortable questions were asked. Like for example the most important one: How the hell did it happen that you announce such a huge change month before the release?! It’s outrageous. I almost felt like interviewer tried to be as apologist as Braben himself.

    • Stellar Duck says:

      He hasn’t been talking to me, that’s for sure.

      • sicemma says:

        @stellarduck

        Did you see this one earlier?

        link to frontier.co.uk

        Braben back in 2010:
        “Move to online-only. This is where the retailers seem to want us to go after all, so perhaps it’s time to make the jump.”

        Certainly makes you wonder how serious they ever were about it, or whether it was just something to use to take people for a ride. The management of my refund certainly seems to be going along similar “tell people whatever will shut them up and then do nothing” lines.

        Also, there’s a mailing list now for people looking for a refund, run by Pibbles from the ED forum. You can request a signup at

        pibbles at eliterefund dot org

    • melnificent says:

      I got a reply eventually. All I had to do was email them and ring up to confirm receipt and intention to commit to court action to recover the refund they are withholding.

      Sadly, the response was we’ll get to you eventually, so not really a response more a cut and paste

      ——————————

      Dear Melnificent,

      thanks for your email to our enquiriesx@ email address which I can confirm has been received.

      As we said in our note of 19 November, we haven’t yet responded to your request as each one takes us some time to investigate. We want to make sure we treat each person’s situation with the thoroughness it deserves.

      I’m afraid we have to ask you to continue to bear with us as we look into your request. We very much hope to be able to respond to you before you feel compelled to begin legal action.

      Kind Regards,

      Support.

      • Stellar Duck says:

        You gotta wonder how long it’ll take them to “investigate”.

        This is a farce honestly, and hearing Braben in that interview made me rather annoyed. If it’s such a small group of players then just give us our money instead of this blowing smoke and misdirecting by saying you’ll give it a think. It’s stupid and disrespectful.

        • TacticalNuclearPenguin says:

          I guess the plan is waiting for the “victim” to cool down. Heh.

          • sicemma says:

            Oh boy, another email! This is now something like the 6th I’ve received since november, all pretty much containing the same line (“did you know there is solo mode! please reconsider!”):

            Hi there,

            For clarity, we would like to ensure that you are clear that the announcement of no off-line play does NOT affect the existing single player mode. Single player mode is (and will remain) in the game, and requires a relatively low bandwidth on-line connection, around 10kbps. In single player mode you will not come into contact with another human player.

            We are sorry we were unable to deliver an acceptable fully off-line mode for Elite: Dangerous, we tried for a long time to find a good solution. We also wish to make sure that you know we would be delighted if you felt able to reconsider your request for a refund and continue playing Elite: Dangerous on-line.

            Thanks in advance for your response.

            Kind Regards,
            The Elite: Dangerous Support Team​

            At this point, if the refund arrives, and it’s that gag from Lock Stock where they send the refunds out as cheques in the shape of a huge cock so nobody wants to take them down to the bank, it would be no surprise at all.

            It’s weird, so many boilerplate emails to me asking me to reconsider, not one word back from them about the payment dispute yet.

          • derbefrier says:

            seems to be the case I got the same canned response. I get this feeling they are waiting for the flames to cool off before outright denying the refund. I hope i am wrong though. I understand this shit happens but its important to handle it correctly and not just say screw you we got your money now fuck off.

          • sicemma says:

            It seems to be a bit of a mess from reading the refunds thread and mailing list – some people have been given full refunds for kickstarter donations (the equivalent of simply pre-ordering the game tier), some people have been denied the same, some people have been denied refunds in one email, then given a full refund in another unprompted email a day later, then offered a partial refund, etc. I just got another email from them referring to me as a “backer” this morning, and I ordered it waayyy after the kickstarter finished.

            Seriously at this point if it matters to you whether you get your money back I would just go straight to your credit card company or paypal – there does not seem to be any sense in how FD are handling it themselves.

      • AlienMind says:

        Can you give me the email address?, as the one I got from “Michael” in the kickstarter messaging system is bogus.

        • gschmidl says:

          I (not a KS backer, not a beta participant) contacted them through the web form and got a reply that I’d be refunded within 5 or so days. A day later, the form letter you quoted also arrived, but I did indeed receive a refund on the fifth day.

        • melnificent says:

          I used the webform initially. But after switching to enquiresx@frontier.co.uk got a quick response saying give us time posted to the initial webform enquiry ticket.

          Since then I’ve been emailed by one of the higher ups (not going to disclose their email address), and over the course of a day promised a call/email for the next day. That was the 25th there was no call or email and then it has been silence again.

          Sent a follow up email to the higher up yesterday that they’ll get on Monday, but really at this point it seems like they just want to ignore and hope I go away.

          • sicemma says:

            Same thing here for me, the only way I got a response at all was by launching a tech support ticket for ED related to my store refund request. The form on the store turns green and says ‘submitted’ but spits out no ticket number and gives no confirmation and no email. Have to wonder if that’s actually working exactly as intended.

          • melnificent says:

            I have a rough draft for money claim online if you feel like that route. I’m just counting down the days to hit the submit button as I think it’s the only thing that Frontier will respond to properly without an empty platitude

    • Trotar says:

      I’m a lot more annoyed with backers demanding a refund.
      From pre-orders I can understand, but when you help kickstart a game you are giving your money with the understanding that it’s an ongoing process and things will change. They always do, E:D is no different from any other project in that.
      To promise you help fund it and then withdraw that promise, to me is unacceptable and really a low thing to do.
      And those ‘backers’ then make it worse by making a huge deal out of it too, acting all entitled.

      And I don’t believe for a moment that people that played online really can’t live without an offline mode.
      What I think is going on is that they were just disappointing and let their emotion get the better of them rather then give it a seconds thought what would be actually best for the game and themselves.

      • Horg says:

        ”acting all entitled”

        That word has really become a cliche. Legally, all backers are now entitled to a full refund as they changed the description of the product after taking payments. The law does not recognise kickstarter as an ”investment”. You are putting down money for a clearly defined product, expecting delivery of that product in working order with all the advertised features. The kickstarter ToS supports this. It is a complete myth that developers have the power to throw out features as they see fit. Those that do are simply breaking the law and abusing the trust of their most invested customers. Developers walk a fine line between pitching big to attract funds and keeping their promises realistic. For those who over promise, the law is on the side of the consumer, and anyone who feels sufficiently compromised by Frontiers cancellation of offline mode are absolutely within their right to get their money back.

        • Trotar says:

          link to kickstarter.com

          Throughout the process, creators owe their backers a high standard of effort, honest communication, and a dedication to bringing the project to life. At the same time, backers must understand that when they back a project, they’re helping to create something new — not ordering something that already exists. There may be changes or delays, and there’s a chance something could happen that prevents the creator from being able to finish the project as promised.

          High standard of effort, check
          Honest communication, check
          Dedication to bringing the project to life, check

          Do the complaining backers understand that they are helping to create something new, and that there may be changes? I guess some of them don’t.

          they offer to return any remaining funds to backers who have not received their reward (in proportion to the amounts pledged), or else explain how those funds will be used to complete the project in some alternate form.

          I didn’t quote everything to not make it to big, but I don’t see anything they did wrong. What I see is backers not realizing what it means to back a kickstarter.

          edit:
          If you want to continue you claim they somehow broke the law by dumping 1 feature, you would have to show some proof that you are right about that.

          • Horg says:

            If you don’t understand how breaking the law is doing something wrong, I think we can consider this conversation closed.

          • schlusenbach says:

            They didn’t remove one feature, they changed their product from a standalone game to a limited time service. Playing an offline or online game is a fundamental difference.

            Once a year I take some time to play Half-Life 2. It’s still great, I love playing it and it’s a classic. In ten years from now, I can’t do that with Elite, because the servers are long gone then.

            You might not care about that, but many people do.

          • Janichsan says:

            Once a year I take some time to play Half-Life 2. It’s still great, I love playing it and it’s a classic. In ten years from now, I can’t do that with Elite, because the servers are long gone then.

            That’s a funny comparison, considering HL2 requires Steam. What happens if Steam is gone in 10 years? What if Valve decided you have lost your right to play HL2 and simply deactivate your account (which they totally can do)?

          • Trotar says:

            They didn’t remove one feature, they changed their product from a standalone game to a limited time service. Playing an offline or online game is a fundamental difference.

            This is exactly the problem with the complainers, they make it bigger then it actual is.
            It was ALWAYS an online game, offline would have been a crippled down version.
            Never did they pretend that it was fundamentally an offline game.
            Did you even back the game at all? How can you not know this?

            In ten years from now, I can’t do that with Elite, because the servers are long gone then

            That’s non-sense. They are planning to support this game for a long time.
            Many popular mmo’s last for a long time, and this is pretty much David Brabens dream project. So why on earth would he drop support for it.
            There is no reason to assume such a thing.
            Beside, they have said that if at some point that would happen (again, which they don’t intend for it to happen) they would release the server code.

            Those are no good reasons to retract funding for a game they already played online.

          • airmikee says:

            RE: Janichsan
            Now introducing the ~10 year old feature, Steam Offline Mode.
            link to support.steampowered.com

            While Valve can cut off access to a game, they have to have a legal explanation for doing so according to section 10.C of the Steam Subscriber Agreement.
            link to store.steampowered.com

            Take the game ‘Legends of Pegasus’ as an example. Developer bankrupted and never really finished the game so Steam no longer offers it for sale, but Steam lets anyone that already purchased it to continue trying to play the game. If it had been an MMO, those unlucky few wouldn’t be able to play it all since the developer would have shut down the servers.

            You’re talking about the slim chance that Steam would cut off access to a users game or disappear leaving us without the ability to play our games, and comparing that to the guaranteed, inevitable end result that the Elite:Dangerous servers will eventually be shut down.

            E:D was a game that I was looking forward to playing for the next few decades, exploring a digital galaxy the same size as our real galaxy. Being forced to play online means the company providing the servers will have to leave them on for those few decades. Now be honest with yourself, what do you think the chances are that Frontier will leave a subscriptionless game server online for decades? Personally, I give that possibility the same odds of happening as Steam going out of business without issuing a final patch to authenticate games permanently.

            Thankfully, I do not believe in backing Kickstarter projects, because of the chance of changed promises like in this very situation. I don’t need to worry about a refund, and I’ll just keep playing X and Evochron until Star Citizen comes out. Some games work better multiplayer, but in my opinion, exploring a galaxy is better alone.

          • airmikee says:

            link to archive.beefjack.com

            Found this while doing some searching about E:D.

            “When asked if the game’s networking technology, which involves a mixture of peer-to-peer and server connections, would require long-term financial support from Frontier to keep the online Elite: Dangerous universe running, Braben said: “Yes, and we’re planning ways of doing that. I’m always concerned with games that are server-based that you can’t then play them after the publisher or whoever turns the servers off. We’ll structure it in a way that you could play it entirely locally, so it would survive time if that makes sense.”

            Another broken promise.

          • Premium User Badge

            BlueTemplar says:

            “If you don’t understand how breaking the law is doing something wrong, I think we can consider this conversation closed.”
            Ah, but we’re probably touching the crux of the issue here!
            Every person has his own set of ethics, which correspond more or less to the legal code of their country (which is more or less enforced, but that’s another discussion).

            Remember how the law has trouble adapting to the extremely high rate of innovation on the Internet? Kickstarter is probably another example of that.

            And that’s how you have one set (A) of people that (they consider) it’s NOT WRONG to do X because of *reasons* due to their set of *values/ethics*, while another set (B) of people disagrees (because of their own set of *values/ethics*) and uses the argument that it’s UNLAWFUL to do X (in that specific country, which isn’t even clear considering we’re on the World Wide Web).

            They then proceed to talk past each other, and my theory it’s because the *reasons* of (B) tend to be less exposed because they feel they don’t need to because they have the LAW on their side.

          • Cinek says:

            High standard of effort, check
            Honest communication, check

            BULLSHIT.
            They’ve been doing everything BUT having a high standard of effort or honest communication. What they’re doing is an exact opposite of honest communication!

            It was ALWAYS an online game, offline would have been a crippled down version.

            Same can be said about an offline singleplayer mode of pretty much every game ever. Watch Dogs? Crippled down version in an offline. Farcry 4? Crippled down version in an offline… and so on, and so on. It’s a moot point. Noone expected every functionality of an online version to be replicated 1:1 in an offline version. It’s simply not possible. But in no way it’s an excuse for all the crap that happens. Especially devs selling a pre-orders while still promising the offline version just to change their mind a month before the release. It’s ridiculous.

      • AlienMind says:

        So I should back a game based on what he advertises, and I quote “the game code will not include DRM (Digital Rights Management)”, and then when he’s not doing it be okay with that? Fuck that!

        • Cinek says:

          By his logic – I can start a kickstarter for some random amazing game 3D shooter game I imagined with some beautiful 3D renders, gather few million dollars for it, and in the end make simple flash 2D point and click game – and everything would be fine as long as I have “3 checks” from his list. *facepalm*

          • Asurmen says:

            That’s the best example of a straw man argument I’ve ever seen. Congratulations!

          • Universal Quitter says:

            Right, cause that’s comparable to what happened here. People like you make me want to buy an extra copy, just to offset you little obsessive fuck-weasels.

            I’d keep calling you names, but I think I’ll go enjoy my game. My connection meets the minimum requirements so I don’t have to rationalize my way into thinking I deserve a refund

          • sicemma says:

            Might be more than another copy of the game. Let’s see, what was alpha and beta, 300 and 100 pounds? And the other beta was 50 pounds. And don’t forget there’s a fee for losing a chargeback – no idea what it is in the UK, it’s like $25 here.

            Damn dude. This is going to be a pretty expensive game all told.

      • Zenicetus says:

        It’s not just Kickstarter backers asking for refunds. There are many people who bought into the Premium Beta and later Beta access who weren’t Kickstarter backers, and who were told by forum moderators right up until a week before the announcement that there would be an Offline mode.

        And any argument that they “played the game” so they shouldn’t get a refund won’t wash, because what we’ve been able to play in the Betas wasn’t anywhere near the full game, just “vertical slices” for testing, in a locked bubble of stars, not the full Galaxy that opened up with the Gamma and release version.

        As it was said elsewhere here, if there are only a few people asking for refunds, then give them their refunds so we can all move on. I’m enjoying what I’ve seen of the game so far, but my respect for the company has fallen over this episode, and I’m now very wary of any claims of what they’ll offer in the future. Clearing up the refund situation would help repair that damage.

        • Trotar says:

          My respect for them has increased actually.
          I think they been very respectful toward very vocal and negative reactions.
          They showed willing to re-assess their refund policy.
          And they dared make hard decisions for the good of the game and the majority of the players.

          • Cinek says:

            “I think they been very respectful” – yea, cause that’s what respectful companies do. Begin story with a lie and then continue lying to their customers hoping that they’ll eventually shut up and money will stay in the “respectful company” pockets.
            Your respect for them has actually increased? You can’t be serious.

      • melnificent says:

        Except I didn’t kickstart the game. Not touched kickstarter outside of indie music stuff that I know always deliver.

        Elite Dangerous was something I picked up in August this year on the understanding that while it was online only at present offline was coming. They changed their minds before release. Considering I’ve been a fair few places where nothing but a basic port 80/443 works and that’s on a whitelist basis offline was a major factor in my deciding to take the plunge before release.

        So the choice is simple, give me offline or give me a refund. Failure to deliver a service or goods as advertised is covered under UK sales laws. It’s not hard to understand really.

      • Green Bob says:

        *Shake you head Trotar*

        People are annoyed and angry about the way FD handled this situation. Several commitments (including concrete deliverables) were part of the campaign and the creator (David Braben, Frontier Developments) has recently revealed that they will not be fulfilled. While most of KS backers understand that project definitions are somewhat speculative by nature and nothing can be predicted with 100% accuracy, the concern with this issue stems from the evidence that these commitments were abandoned willfully, by choice, and not as a result of unforeseen circumstances nor even good old fashioned mismanagement. In short, we have the distinct impression that these (non-trivial) commitments will not be fulfilled by the creator, largely because they’ve simply chosen not do to so, and in fact conducted themselves in such a way as to guarantee that the fulfillment would not be made, without having revealed this to the backers until just now, when the project is set to be exposed for a retail release for general consumer purchase.

      • Premium User Badge

        JimmyJamNYC says:

        I agree with you. People keep saying “breaking the law” but I’m curious what law has been broken? I’ll take either UK or US laws as proof, but which law? Kickstarter is a “share in the risks and rewards” thing. Like a CSA.

        That being said, I think refunds should be given freely. I’m sticking with it, as are a lot of others. I can’t believe it will break the bank for the devs.

        • Horg says:

          UK Sale of Goods act, specifically the clauses covering the product being ‘not as described’. You could also make a case for ‘not fit for purpose’ if you put down money while intending to play offline only.

          • Asurmen says:

            Given the nature of Kickstarter and the promises and how the product has been sold/advertised, I would say Customer Contracts Regulations apply better than Sale of Goods Act, namely: If you request a service starts straightaway In this instance you will still have the right to cancel, but you must pay for the value of the service that is provided up to the point you cancel.

            For example, if you buy a service like gym membership and start using the gym and then change your mind within this 14 day time period, you will be refunded but could be charged for the amount of gym time you used.

            The 14 day period refers to the days after a product has been delivered and you can cancel from ordering up to this 14 day period, so from when bought until 14 days after full release I would guess.

            This could explain why they’re not giving refunds/taking it on case by case basis when alpha/beta has been used because they’re not required to.

          • Horg says:

            When they promised a DRM free offline capable game, they were irrefutably selling an independent product, not access to a service. Even now the ‘service’ angle is probably false in the context of EU law. With that in mind, the amount of early access that a customer may or may not have used up to the point of the offline cancellation announcement is irrelevant. If you were to argue this in court (or apply for a charge back), you would demonstrate grounds for a refund based on the changes made to the product you initially paid for, not whatever state the game is currently in.

          • sicemma says:

            Also let’s not forget their early responses to refunds of flatly denying entire categories of purchase from being able to claim a refund (falsely, to some, as well – telling people who’d bought from the store they couldn’t get a refund for a kickstarter tier). This is about as flatly illegal a thing under consumer law as exists here, and I believe it’s the same in the UK and EU. You can never tell a customer that they have no entitlement to a refund under any conditions, and you can never remove conditions for a refund that are allowable under law, only add to them.

      • adelicatebalance says:

        I can’t read all the responses to your comment, because I feel the same way as you and it really saddens me how damned entitled some people think they are.

        Offline single-player with 400,000,000,000 systems… nonsense – anyone who thought they were going to get that was asking to disappointment themselves! As for people demanding refunds from Kickstarter projects or early access things – ha! Simply be more discerning with your money or accept what you did with it, which is donate it to someone to create something with. In the end, if you don’t like what they did with your donation, tough! Learn your lesson and just don’t jump into things with such fervour based on a feature, which, upon any serious analysis was never going to happen.

        All this business about devs “promising” this and that. It’s like people who think that politicians don’t keep their “promises”. If you listen carefully to politicians they will /never/ make serious promises they can be kept to. Kickstarter projects are not promises, they have goals to attempt to achieve.

        In the particular case of Elite, I’ve been surprised how many people I’ve heard complaining about one thing or another. I’ve been wondering if I’m the only one left with a sense of awe at the scope and possibility of the game.

        Yes I have played since beta. No. I’m not a dev. I’m just not a deluded man-child either.

        • Horg says:

          Your ignorance of consumer law and consumer rights is embarrassing in the extreme.

    • Stevostin says:

      I am on the selling front, for other stuff. Refund are very very very uncommon. Beside the people absolutely wanting an offline mode are more certainly less than 1% buyer. It’s a common mistake to extrapolate the rest of mankind upon her/his own case.

      Now of course they sold in the hundreds of thousands. One percent of that is still plenty enough to make huge flames on forum. Now here is another rule of thumb in selling games online: the people who rants the most on forum are typically the one who spends the most, before and after ranting. It doesn’t mean you can’t “loose it” with bad decisions and people loosing interest in your product. But what will be an issue for the main pack and that specific niche part of the crowd is most often than note not linked.

      • Zenicetus says:

        I think you’re missing one aspect of this situation. Elite Dangerous is a quasi-MMO that doesn’t have a monthly subscription, and doesn’t have pay-to-win micro transactions to help fund the company. Just minor cosmetic stuff like selling ship skins. They need to sell major expansion DLC to keep the company running, like the promised “walking around stations” DLC and landing on planets DLC.

        When they treat customers badly — as seen by even a portion of their user base who aren’t asking for refunds — then it affects how these customers feel about pre-ordering or buying into paid Beta access for this upcoming DLC.

        They handled this badly, and they need to repair the damage to ensure future sales of DLC. Especially if they care about pre-orders to smooth out cash flow.

      • aepervius says:

        You are missing something : the bad publicity. While I think too the number of refund was limited (it was probably in that order of magnitude of 1%, but I would be wary of putting a fix 1% number on it), it certainly showed everybody how they treated potential customer. I am wagging that if they had from the start said “whoever want will get a refund” more people would have been patient, less asked for a refund, and they would have more potential sale in the future. Instead for example, for me braben is branded as “be wary of whatever that guy might make in the future”. Then again the only reason I might have been interrested into E:D was the offline mode. So that might bias my opinion.

    • AlienMind says:

      You are right.
      First, a “Michael” in the Kickstarter Messaging system told me that he does nothing and I should write to support@zaonce.net . I did that a week ago. Nothing happens.

    • Green Bob says:

      It is more then that… I have supported them on KS and did not play the game and my first request two weeks ago was refused…then i received one additional cookie cutter email and nothing after. Limbo for about 5days.

      Only small number of refunds?!?? LMAO…yea right. Lies Lies Lies! I wonder how long it will take for them to shutdown the servers and screw the other half of their supporters!

    • Kerr Avon says:

      Good point.

  2. Cinek says:

    Quick request on future talks – don’t put one person on left channel and another on right. It’s really annoying and makes it needlessly difficult to focus on what you’re talking about. Either make them equal on both channels, or something like 60-40% volume split on a channels.
    That said though – it’s nice to hear some voices for a change. :)

    • Rizlar says:

      Although I found it easy enough to get used to, it would indeed feel more natural to have both voices coming from somewhere in front of you rather than either side of your head. It may be more of an issue on headphones.

      • Cinek says:

        Oh yea, could be. I did listen it on headphones, can’t compare with a proper speakers.

        • SuicideKing says:

          I was listening to it on headphones, and then as you pointed out it was really disorienting when the Skype session started, so I switched to speakers, which were fine.

    • Arren says:

      Sixties-style hard-panning? It’s like stereophonic sound is brand new all over again!

    • Bereil says:

      Yeah, that audio split was really weird sounding on headphones. Otherwise it was a good listen, English English are the best voices (speaking as a Canadian).

    • jonfitt says:

      Ha! I just came to the comments to find out if there was a problem with the audio and this explains it!
      I am listening with one headphone in, so all I hear is Brendan talking to the ether!

  3. Premium User Badge

    Bluerps says:

    My thoughts on this are pretty much the same as when Mr. Grayson did his video interviews: I think it’s a nice idea, but I don’t want to have too many of these. I do enjoy listening to you people, but it’s not something I can do in my break at work. Also, reading an article is simply faster than listening to an audio version of it.

  4. Malcolm says:

    I have to admit that I would much prefer a transcript.

    • slerbal says:

      Agreed. I *read* RPS, I rarely watch the videos and basically never listen to the podcasts. Sorry, but it is the truth. I prefer the written word.

      • tumbleworld says:

        Totally. This mainly feels like “I couldn’t be arsed to type it up”.

        • benthere says:

          That’s a bit unfair. There is information in hearing the pauses and overlaps of an audio interview. That said, I had no plans to listen (I may have skimmed a transcript) but a comment below piqued my interest.

          Regarding the pans, I listen to a fair amount of radio theater, so the positional audio didn’t bother me. But I sadly admit I may be in the minority. The difference was very noticeable with headphones, not so much with speakers.

    • warthog2k says:

      I too love RPS for the well considered, well crafted articles. I rarely enjoy and mostly skip video or audio articles on other sites.

      Reading is also way more accessible for me when I’m on the move, at work or just quietly at home. I can struggle by with crap data signal or enjoy a moment in a quiet corner.

      Don’t get me wrong, I enjoy gameplay vids on YouTube, mostly competitive eSports or Let’s Play. I just don’t feel the interview or formal review format is improved by pouring to this medium.

    • Eggman says:

      I concur, good sir.

    • caff says:

      Whereas I think it’s quite nice to hear the voices of the RPS team every now and then :)

      • slerbal says:

        Certainly I have nothing against their lovely voices. I just prefer to read the articles, though of course if RPS want to make podcasts etc then more power to them! :)

      • Premium User Badge

        RaveTurned says:

        I like to read articles, and I like to listen to podcasts. However, this post doesn’t seem to show up on the RPS podcast feed, and I don’t know of any other way to persuade my podcast app to find this post. :(

        I’d prefer to listen to things like this on the go. If I have to be tied to my desk instead, I’d prefer a transcript.

    • Premium User Badge

      BlueTemplar says:

      I wonder how good is automatic transcript software nowadays? Google Now certainly does a good job at understanding me!

  5. melnificent says:

    I appreciate the effort put into producing an audio post. However, I do prefer the written word due to poor hearing. Any chance of a write up?

    As others have said above.. He dodged questions on refunds, which when you call frontier and speak to support they say have been overwhelming. So either support is just a single lady and machine or Braben is lying….again.

    • Amatyr says:

      As a total percentage of those who have already bought the game it’s entirely possible for that to be a small number of people relatively but still be overwhelming in terms of them not being able to respond to everyone that rapidly.

      • jrodman says:

        It falsifies the “we’ve talked to everyone”, it doesn’t falsify it being a small percentage.

  6. Rizlar says:

    I want to hear more from Arthur Mears.

    Anyway, since the other comments all seem to be negative: I like the podcast format. It provides something a bit different to a written article in terms of content as well as just format and the fact that you can listen to it while getting on with other stuff.

    Obviously written articles should still be a thing but I would welcome more podcasts/audio interviews. Especially as part of the supporter program since it seems to be about trying new stuff that wouldn’t exist otherwise. Prefer audio to video as well, mainly because you can listen while doing something else, but also because it’s just nice.

    • Vandelay says:

      Very late to the party here (my phone signed me out, so missed lots of these supporter posts,) and this will probably never be read, but want to agree with those saying boo to the naysayers.

      I want RPS in written, audio, video, playable, Broadway musical or any other possible form you can think of. I’ve said from the start that I think the supporter posts are a great way to experiment with new forms of delivery, so I’m definitely happy to be your guinea pig.

      Edit: should of added, more Electronic Wireless Show please!

  7. Fiyenyaa says:

    Lots of people seem to prefer the written word; just gonna push my two pence in and say; more podcasts, audio content, video content. I loves it, myself. I was very excited when I saw the RPS Podcast was restarted (again) the other month or so, and I’m now very sad that it seems to have stalled.

    I mean yeah, the reason I come to RPS is to read stuff – but I like all the rest of it too!

  8. Ham Solo says:

    I quite like the idea of a “wot I heard”, and the sound is fine, too. Do more pls.

  9. melnificent says:

    Changed my mind, I like the audio report for one good reason. It shows accurately what people say and under what conditions :)

  10. MajorManiac says:

    Good charisma Pip.

    This was like listening to Radio 4. I now wish there was an RPS radio station. Bet Tim Stone sounds avuncular.

  11. Tutamun says:

    Listened to it so I can make a comment.
    I liked it… but I still prefer written text as I can read that anywhere.

  12. Paraquat says:

    There seem to be a lot of people who want less of this kind of thing, but I enjoyed it. More, please!

  13. OliverM says:

    Haven’t listened to it – I’m not often in a situation where I can just play something audio, and I don’t always have headphones with me. Probably because I far prefer reading to listening. I can read much quicker than normal speaking pace, and if I lose concentration for a moment I can quickly scan back and find the thread again.

  14. Wowbagger says:

    When I went to the soundcloud to listen to it, it doesn’t exist there, is this due to it being a supporter post?

    • Philippa Warr says:

      Yep – while it’s supporter-only it won’t be visible on the main soundcloud page. Will switch it to public when the post goes out to all

  15. mavu says:

    Still listening, but i very much like the format. podcast with focus on one topic, not too long. Vey nice idea, and very nice execution. Please continue to do this when the opportunity arises.

    • B.rake says:

      Quite like focused segment as well… plus if you combine a few of these segments it’s a nice radio/television style alternative to the freeform discussion that podcasts tend toward.

  16. Premium User Badge

    Hodge says:

    I liked it and would gladly listen to more of these :).

    You could always transcribe the straight-up interview bits for people who don’t have time to listen to it. Also you should give Arthur a regular spot on the show.

  17. Premium User Badge

    oggnogg says:

    While I prefer reading I did enjoy listening to this one. I wouldn’t mind you repeating this format every now and then.
    And I agree about the left/right audio: It does feel weird on a 7.1 system. 60%/40% volume sounds like a good suggestion.

  18. SigmaCAT says:

    I like it! It’s a pleasure to see RPS evolve into something more “3 dimensional”, invading my room a little bit more :) But english is not my mother tongue, and british accents are a little bit opaque to me (too much US telly, i know) so maybe the text transcript would be nice!

    (By the time I wrote this, i’ve finished the podcast and I understood more than I would have thought. English is coooool.)

    Regarding Elite, I haven’t played a space sim since X-Wing Alliance (wow!) and the Spore space age, and Elite sounds very sexy to me, is it accessible to space-flight newbies?

    • Cinek says:

      “is it accessible to space-flight newbies?” – I would say: No. There’s many different space sims that might be more friendly for a new gamers, I can personally recommend Freespace 2 – IMHO that’s the best starting point. That game got very immerse world with excellent missions design, plenty of unique and distinct ships, easy to learn flight model, great graphics and plenty of small mechanics that you will find in other games, including Elite (eg. splitting power between engines/weapons/shields).
      Elite got a very steep learning curve (especially if you don’t have a joystick), even people with plenty of experience in space sims need some time adjusting to it, and in many ways this game is quite unconventional for space sims. Storytelling takes basically a back seat, spacecrafts are oddly similar to eachother and it’s a game oriented very much towards mechanics themselves while at the same time having very, very dodgy system that allows you to cooperate with other players making it oddly difficult to take an advantage of online mode which is forced upon you.
      If you enjoyed X-wing Alliance I would also recommend taking a look at Star Citizen – it’s more similar to Alliance than Elite (Elite is closer to I-War series or X series).

      • SigmaCAT says:

        Freespace 2: duly noted and actively chasing. Thanks bunches for the reply! I’ve been aware of Star Citizen for a while now, thanks to da RPS homepage; but right now, I dont have the subtility to really differentiate the two.

        I’ve heard a lot about Freelancer too, and was hesitating about grabbing this? Returning to Alliance, it’s not really that I liked it, it’s that it was the only space flight game I owned, I was 8 and piloting a spaceship. It was awesome.

        Still, I own a joystick and am not that scared by the challenge of learning something completely new, I’ll probably let Sandy Claws choose between SC and ED for me. :D

        • SuicideKing says:

          Yup, FreeSpace 2 is probably the best game EVER, according to my biased opinion. Do check out the FreeSpace Open mods that’ll make it visually pleasing.
          link to hard-light.net

          Alternatively check out fsoinstaller dot com for a more automated setup process (didn’t want the comment system to think I’m posting spam by posting too many links).

        • Cinek says:

          Freelancer is very weird. It’s one of most arcade space sims out there and while it does offer more freedom than freespace – in a way it’s also unlike most of the other space sims and can really give you plenty of bad habits (on Elite or Star Citizen forums people who played Freelancer are very easy to spot by the suggestions they give to the game development – stuff that everyone else consider more of a poison than anything good).

          If you are looking for more free flight model with exploration – I would strongly recommend X3: Terran Conflict instead. X3 is much closer to Elite than Freelancer and it’ll teach you better habits (most importantly: patience and working with complex menus) than Freelancer does (which is largely 3rd person view with mouse controls and reflex-based combat).

          Though again – seems like everyone agree that Freespace 2 is a great starting point into the space sims :)

      • FriendlyFire says:

        Freespace 2 is an amazing game, and it’s playable with a mouse and keyboard (it’s not ideal, you can see the joystick was their focus, but it’s still totally fine), and it’s cheap all the time on GOG so yes do go get it.

        If you want to dig some more, look at Freelancer. It’s got a fun storyline, it’s open world free roaming space opera with an arcade focus with lots and lots of mods. It’s also one of the few space sims that play best with a mouse and keyboard (heck, it doesn’t support anything else, imagine that). It even still has a small fanbase that plays online on a few player-run persistent dedicate server (something Elite will never have and which Star Citizen isn’t particularly clear about).

    • Zenicetus says:

      I’ll second (or third?) the recommendation of Freespace 2, especially with the Freespace Open mod to modernize the graphics somewhat.

      You may or may not like Elite Dangerous. It’s an odd duck at the moment. On the one hand, it’s very impressive visually, with excellent sound design and a nice attention to astronomical detail if you’re an astronomy nerd like me.

      On the other hand, the game also feels like they’re throwing a bunch of different space game ideas against the wall, and seeing what sticks. Trading, exploring, piracy, bounty hunting, mining — all that stuff is in the game, but oddly disjointed and feeling half-finished. It will probably come together eventually, but right now it’s a loose collection of ideas, and players have to bring some role-playing into the game to enjoy it, I think.

      So yes, start with Freespace 2 to see if you enjoy the genre enough to dive into ED. And get a joystick if you don’t already have one.

      • Chaz says:

        Yeah I’m in agreement with you there. The whole space thing is amazing if that’s your bag. A supposedly 1-1 scale galaxy to buzz around in. It really is quite incredible to behold and I could probably send a great deal of time just finding unusual planets to go and look at.

        If the whole cosmos and stargazing thing doesn’t float your boat, then the actual game play bits in it right now are rather basic and the bare minimum of what you’d expect them to be. The fact that quite a few of those bits are still broken, requiring a good deal of tweaking and patching a mere 16 days before release, and my advice would be to hold off for a while until it gets fleshed out a bit more and has some of the rough edges shaved off. It doesn’t help when the forums are infested with the usual tiresome rabid apologists that think the game is absolutely brilliant just the way it is. But sadly that just seems par the course these days.

        • SigmaCAT says:

          Hey y’all, thanks all a lot for all your answers, especially about the FSO mod, looks like the community rocks hard \o\ Anywayz, I broke out the old flight stick, and last night was intense. OH GOD YES. Thank you all.

  19. Sp4rkR4t says:

    I love E:D but I’m really worried for launch, at the minute a offline single player version of what we currently have with fixed mapping tools would be superbly received as a wonderful exploration game/space trucking simulator but making it online only with such completely broken online friend tools and shaky servers is going to cripple this project before it gets it’s legs.

    • Chaz says:

      Yep, they really need to pay a bit more service to those that just want to solo play. Even in solo play there are systems that are clearly designed around the online play that hamper enjoyment of the solo game.

      The biggest bugger bear of those right now is the mission timers. If you take a mission right now, like delivering cargo to a station, you will get a timer, usually somewhere up to around 2 hours. If you do not complete that mission in time, you get fined, the cargo in your hold is marked as stolen and you might get a bounty placed on your head. The main problem is that if you have several of these missions accepted, and you probably will; if you need to log off for whatever reason, the mission timers will keep on ticking over in real time.

      So if you lose connection to the servers for what ever reason and you log back on in a couple of hours or the next day. You will find yourself with fines, a cargo hold full of stolen goods and a bounty on your head. It’s punishing players for events often out of their control and not fun. An ideal and simple solution of course would be to suspend the timers when solo players log out. Unfortunately there seems to be a rabid hardcore of Elite players that are vehemently opposed to this for no good reason that I can make out. Their argument is that suspending a mission like that would adversely effect the online universe, which frankly is utter bullshit.

      I would really like Elite to succeed as I really want to see planetary landings put in, if done on the same scale as the rest of the game has been done in. But Frontier are going to have to broaden the audience a bit for it if they want it to be a big success and make it more accessible for the more time poor casual player. Lets face it they’ve already got the money from the people who really really wanted to play the game off the back of the previous Elites, and they’ve even managed to lose some of them. To really get the game running and secure its future and fulfill it potential it’s going to need lots of fresh new customers. It won’t get those if it releases in its current state.

      They’re trying to position Elite as an online game but the content and social features for that just aren’t there yet. Grouping with friends still doesn’t work, the galactic economy is still screwed and as for these “events” we’re supposed to be seeing, well I’ve certainly not seen any evidence of them intruding into my game world yet. I’m guessing because they haven’t done any yet. Which in itself is kind of worrying.

      Only 16 days to go till launch. I don’t know about launch, I think it’s going to be a rocky first few months for ED.

  20. theodacourt says:

    Really like this! The left / right audio thing is a problem. I think podcasts generally should be mono anyway, so it’s the same from either speaker. It sounds a lot better and also makes the files half the size!

    Another thing is that the volume changes a bit much. Brendon sounds very quiet compared to Braban and the end interview. You can see on the soundcloud file how the bars become shorter in Brendon’s part!

    The way to fix this is to use compression, and apply it to the whole thing when you’ve finished. This should makes the volume regular throughout the whole thing. Just mess around with it and it should be fine! There is compression in Audacity, if that’s the program you’re using!

  21. kajdanovitch says:

    On RPS’s road to multimedia broadcasting :D

    Great podcast Philippa.

    Just a comment about the form though. I think the split left/right during the interview with Brandy is a TERRIBLE idea. It makes the whole conversation very unpleasant in my headphones !! ( I can’t get them off, they’re attached to my scalp ).
    I feel like I’m deaf in one ear, then the other, then the other again, and when you both talk at the same time, sour liquid comes up my esophagus, like when using a badly calibrated oculus rift :(

    Anyway, thanks again for the best news on PC gaming out there <3

  22. SuicideKing says:

    I think the podcast’s a lovely idea! Quite enjoyed it. I like that RPS is experimenting. And Phillipa, you have a lovely voice! So polite too. <3

    Which parts of the UK are you and Brendan from? I'm curious about the accents (I'm not from the UK, so I don't know). (I hope it's not rude to ask, though! If it is please do let me know).

    Just three suggestions/things I'd like to bring up:
    1) Please consider avoiding assigning a single channel to a person, as it's extremely disorienting when using headphones. It does sound quite nice on speakers, though – it's like the two people are sitting in front of you (which I suppose is the effect you were going for ?).

    2) Regarding the call sounding "flat": I found it perfectly fine (except the above mentioned issue) but I believe people add a small amount of noise (Audacity allows you to do this, don't know what you've used for this) to make everything sound more “natural”.

    3) Sound Cloud has a limit on the storage provided to a free account, I think it's around 200-300 MB. RPS probably has a paid-for account, but I found out the hard way so I thought I'd point it out.

    Keep it up, RPS! You folks are awesome. :)

  23. SpacemanSpliff says:

    Where I come from when you give someone something you don’t ask for it back. This applies to Kickstarter donations.

    • pepperfez says:

      Do they…have contracts where you’re from?

    • Green Bob says:

      LOL – funny stuff! I am curious if you were involved in making this game happen on Kickstarter?

  24. Synesthesia says:

    Um, guys, please don’t separate channels like that, it really doesn’t work.

    I’m having a blast with elite. I finally did it and played with a friend, and went mining/dogfighting together. It was amazing.
    Once proper social tools are implemented, like sharing bounties/friendlies tagging/sharing missions.

    But yeah, It’s a weird one. I love it for that.

  25. Cockie says:

    My left and right ear have enjoyed this podcast. Separately.
    Seriously though, you have a very nice voice for this kind of thing, Pip (if that’s not a weird thing to say :) )

  26. Boosh says:

    I know it has been already said a lot, but my two penneth is I couldn’t listen to all of this, it was making me dizzy! (headphones you see).

    Loving ED, can’t wait for the release so I can properly get stuck in and begin the journey.

  27. Green Bob says:

    I read this a while back and I agree with it completely.

    As has been made abundantly clear on so many occasions, a persons access to (or otherwise) the internet is irrelevant. The entirety of the matter is summed up as a product being sold that is not as described. It matters not a bit that I have the best internet access in the entire world. I was told a game would have offline and online modes… The developers kept saying it had offline and online modes… I paid for a game with offline and online modes… A short time before releasing the game the developers told us (in a round-about single line buried deep within a completely unassociated section of the newsletter way) that the offline mode was being dropped.

    As a result, everyone who wants it is entitled to the product they paid for or their money back.

    If this matter will, “…open the flood gates for others…” as you state, well I say good. It is clear to me that many developers/creators are using Kickstarter et al as faux interest and repayment free money lending services with few of the requirements of traditional investment/financing options. You only have to see the number of times developer has said “I could never get any of the big names to find this.” to see how this is evolving. It is also becoming clear to other groups who handle consumer protection matters (such as trading standards) and that is why they are looking very closely at issues relating to matters like this one.

    More scrutiny is obviously required into these forms of funding as the number of projects that are failing to achieve expectations is on the rise. Seriously, I can name at least 5 early-access type projects off the top of my head that have screwed the consumer and I’m sure there will be more if I really think about it. It is simply not good enough to say, “…you should never back these projects if you cannot accept change.” Creators must be held to account for what they do and the promises they make to consumers, otherwise projects will just be long lists of promises in order to maximise the money with no real requirement to fulfil those obligations.

    You do yourself and every other consumer a disservice by ignoring this simple fact.

  28. Green Bob says:

    On a lighter note please join us:

    “Elite Offline. Legal action against Frontier Developments” by Simon Hodkinson on Kickstarter – link to kickstarter.com

    and enjoy the following “poem”;

    “Remember Remember”
    Remember remember the eleventh of December
    Offline-mode, deceit and plot.
    I see no reason why offline-mode, treason
    Should ever be forgot…
    David Braben and Frontier Developments
    Did the scheme contrive,
    To screw backers of Kick Starter
    From their hard earn proceeds

    • Horg says:

      I have to respect the balls of anyone who publicly tries to rhyme proceeds with contrive.

      • Blethigg says:

        It looks like they started off intending to make it rhyme, but realised at the 11th hour that it wasn’t practical with the time and resources that they had available. Now what does that remind me of….?

  29. Wooloomooloo says:

    Asked for my refund over two weeks ago, and I’m still waiting for any reply other then the mass-mailed “but you’re aware single player will still be possible, right?” bullshit. Are you listening, DB? I WANT MY MONEY BACK OR A FLAT-OUT REFUSAL, YOU MISERABLE COWARD!

    • Green Bob says:

      They got our money and they don’t care… I hope people remember this betrayal!

      • Apocalypse says:

        Indeed I hope they do. But the lesson learned of countless darwin awards is that people don´t learn.
        Excepting no changes from a kickstarter game is ridiculous.

        I really hope they try to go to court of it, lose and have to pay FD’s legal expenses too.

  30. WaytoomanyUIDs says:

    Braben really is full of it. Is he really saying they thought they could compete the game and slap together an offline mode in a couple of weeks? That just makes my low opinion of them even lower.

    I asked for a refund on the 17th and am still waiting. Only response is the boiler plate acknowledgement that everyone with a refund ticket received on the 19th

  31. Green Bob says:

    Hi Philippa Warr,

    We (I) appreciate you taking your time and doing this story for us!!!

    Thanks & Cheers,

  32. Premium User Badge

    JiminyJickers says:

    Still waiting for my refund, tomorrow will be the 10 business days they promised. I really hope they can just give me my money back already so that I can walk away from this.

    • melnificent says:

      Any luck?

      I just had a message from support informing me that I will finally get a full refund of my beta copy.

      You have given 14 days before the commencement of legal action to recover monies haven’t you?

      Mel

  33. jrodman says:

    Personally I found the audio broadcast enjoyable, but I still prefer text. Sometimes it’s hard for me to figure out what people are saying through accent mismatch, audio quality, and other factors.

    The stereo separation is an OK idea, but the separation should simply be a lot less severe.

    • kajdanovitch says:

      MMh not OK to me… You would never show a shot per eye in a movie, unless it fits the message :)

      • jrodman says:

        You might dislike the separation, I accept that. However, comparing this to a film doesn’t really support your argument. In a film it might be fairly normal to have a a scene where people are in different locations on camera and the voices correspond to that.

  34. Timbrelaine says:

    The left-right channel separation didn’t do it for me, and I would have also liked a written summary at least. But this was a solid interview, and a great idea! Looking forward to more in the future.

  35. Kong says:

    Login to reply old cowboy riding out on dark and windy day.

    When women listened to my games stories and did not run away, we had sex.

    I do not care about channels so much. Her hmhm is music to my ears.
    Sexy voice, knows her craft.
    Well done, more please.

  36. Josh W says:

    Track IR sounds like training for being a doctor who villain, practice tilting your head while locking your gaze onto the object of your attention. If the game is fast enough to punish blinking, then the effect would be complete.

  37. scharmers says:

    Wow, it seems like every Braben-hater seems to gravitate to RPS. You even get the occasional Star Citizen shill slipping in to peddle their own version of snake oil. From reading here and at the E:D forums, the “OMG IT’S ONLINE ONLY QQ” folks are pretty much doing said QQ’ing out of “Pay attention to me” inertia rather any real hurt.

    And look at it this way: Double Fine deliberately dumped an unfinished SB-DF9 on us and turgidly waved away any requests for refunds. They’re getting away with it. So if Braben gives you folks a refund, it shows more class on his part than on what you all “deserve”.

  38. Kittim says:

    I can sympathize with people who want an offline version of ED, I want one too. But, knowing that didn’t stop me preordering (something I swore not to do again) ED Mercenary. I do so partly out of nostalgia and partly because I think what FD are doing looks good.

    My prior posts have proved that I can froth at the mouth and spew bile and hate at some software houses. I make no apologies for that, but I’d love to know how many people complaining about lack of off-line mode also play Ubisoft games that require UPlay?

    I also can’t understand the Star Citizen is better fanboys. The way I look at it is that we’re starved for up-to-date hard-core sci-fi games, the more the merrier IMHO.

    For those of you wanting an Elite style game that plays offline should check out Pioneer, it’s shaping up to be a cracking remake of Frontier.

    • Emeraude says:

      Edit: let’s forget about this, I don’t have the nerves for it.

      • sicemma says:

        I think there’s some comfort in the speed with which “but star citizen” and assorted other “look over there (at this game I don’t own or this company I’ve never interacted with)” excuses are brought out, don’t you?

        Let’s consider how much a slam dunk it would be if there was even one single statement from Frontier where offline is ever referred to as “maybe” feature (rather than absolute “will” or “is” terms), or if there was something indicating that they told their customers as soon as possible (rather than the opposite – that they didn’t even tell people the same week it was decided), or if it was only people who backed the game through kickstarter with it’s assorted good faith effort rooms for wiggling in, rather than also being customers who bought from FD directly through their own web store.

        But it isn’t that. Whoops!

  39. Apocalypse says:

    The stereo sound with Warr left and the guy on the right is freaking me out.

  40. gwathdring says:

    More of this sort of thing! :D

    Lovely.

  41. Kerr Avon says:

    Good article and thanks for the talk, very nicely done. Since classic Elite is traditionally an offline single-player game and always has been, anyone stating the “fact” that the “vast majority” of players suddenly all want it to be an online multiplayer game now, is a liar. A very, very bad liar. Thankfully we are not all living in their George Orwell-esque twisted dream-world of newspeak where telling the truth is a revolutionary act. At least we are lucky enough to have an unbiased games journalism site like RPS, as opposed to the heavily-moderated cringe-worthy paid games forums where politically-incorrect thought is brow-beaten down in an instant as if was being run by the BBC. I mean, the “polls” on the Frontier forum say it all, really. How obviously rigged and fake can you get? Oh well, I guess if the majority of the public don’t notice or care that most political elections are rigged, faked and staged, then I guess Frontier are merely following the example of criminal governments? The only problem of course, is that a typical Elite player probably isn’t a typical brainwashed and gullible BBC TV License payer…

    • Blue_Lemming says:

      I quite like the podcast idea, i stuck it on in the background while super cruising (thats not prison slang).

      Your tin foil hat is in the post..

      You can still play it on your own, it just needs an internet connection(how stable a connection, it hasn’t been said).
      The polls on the forum probably do reflect opinion of the masses(just not yours), and i doubt they have the time or inclination to rig it. Then again, i’ll just leave you to rant in a Alex Jones-esque way, enjoy.

  42. jonfitt says:

    Thanks Philippa, that was enjoyable,